Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

Book Fifteen — the multiplication of mankind after the flood

{Now Chus begot Nemrod: he began to be mighty in the earth, and he was a robust hunter before the Lord. From him went forth the proverb: As Nemrod a robust hunter before the Lord.}

LatineEnglish

{Now Chus begot Nemrod: he began to be mighty in the earth, and he was a robust hunter before the Lord. From him went forth the proverb: As Nemrod a robust hunter before the Lord.}1

Porro Chus genuit Nemrod: ipse coepit esse potens in terra, et erat robustus venator coram Domino. Ab hoc exiuit proverbium: Quasi Nemrod robustus venator coram Domino.

FUIT hic Nemrod sextus filius Chus, qui post alios fratres suos et fratrum nepotes separatim hic memoratur. Nam propter singulare robur eius et audaciam potentiamque ac mundanam felicitatem, cum fuisset eo saeculo famosissimus, extra ordinem dicendus fuit, et separatam propriamque meruit narrationem. Audi Beatum Augustinum: „Chus,“ inquit, „pater gigantis Nemrod, primus nominatus est in filiis Cham, cuius quinque filii iam fuerant computati et nepotes duo: sed istum gigantem aut post nepotes suos natos genuit, aut, quod est credibilius, seorsum de illo propter eius eminentiam Scriptura locuta est; quandoquidem et regnum eius nominatum est, cuius initium fuit civitas illa nobilissima Babylon, et quae iuxta commemorata sunt sive civitates sive regiones.“
This Nemrod was the sixth son of Chus, who is here recorded separately after his other brothers and his brothers' grandsons. For on account of his singular strength and audacity and power and worldly prosperity, since he had been the most famous of that age, he had to be spoken of out of order, and earned a separate and proper narrative. Hear Blessed Augustine: „Chus, the father of the giant Nemrod, was named first among the sons of Cham, five of whose sons had already been counted, and two grandsons: but this giant he either begot after his grandsons were born, or — what is more credible — Scripture spoke of him apart on account of his eminence; seeing that his kingdom too is named, whose beginning was that most noble city Babylon, and the things mentioned alongside, whether cities or regions.“2
Hic primus mortalium affectavit et arripuit tyrannidem. Nam ante hunc in qualibet familia primus natu primus quoque et auctoritatis et honoris gradu erat, lites familiae componens et familiam regens. Hic autem imperium habere in alios concupivit, primo Babylone regnans. Itaque prima tyrannis orta est in ipsa matre confusionis linguarum; et sicut ibi linguarum commercium confusum est, sic et ius legitimi imperii perversum, ubi scilicet audaciae ac temeritatis suae prima statuere monumenta mortales conati sunt. Recte igitur Hieronymus: „Nemrod,“ inquit, „arripuit insuetam primus in populo tyrannidem, regnavitque in Babylone, quae ab eo quod ibi confusae sunt linguae turrim aedificantium Babel appellata est.“
This man was the first of mortals to aim at and seize tyranny. For before him, in any family, the firstborn was also first in degree of authority and honor, settling the disputes of the family and ruling the family. But this man coveted to hold sway over others, reigning first at Babylon. And so the first tyranny arose in the very mother of the confusion of tongues; and just as there the intercourse of tongues was confounded, so too the law of legitimate rule was perverted — where, namely, mortals attempted to set up the first monuments of their audacity and rashness. Rightly therefore Jerome: „Nemrod was the first to seize an unwonted tyranny among the people, and reigned in Babylon, which, from the fact that there the tongues of those building the tower were confounded, was called Babel.“3
…[quidam scribit] in suis Annotationibus in Genesim: „Nemrod,“ ait, „mole corporis et virtute superans alios homines, dominum coepit exercere per violentiam, et induxit eos ad idololatriam, ut ignem quasi deum colerent, quia utilitates maximas beneficio Solis qui igneus est contingere videbat; quem errorem postea Chaldaei secuti sunt.“ Itaque multiplicem iniuriam et Deo et homini fecit. Deus enim solus debebat praeesse homini, quod ille abstulit cum se illi interposuit, simulque debitum ei cultum ademit; homini vero iniuriam fecit, quia eum dominio iniusto oppressit, et in errorem decipiendo induxit. Sed excutiamus verba Mosis.
…[a certain writer says] in his Annotations on Genesis: „Nemrod, surpassing other men in bulk of body and in strength, began to exercise lordship by violence, and led them into idolatry, that they might worship fire as though it were a god, because he saw the greatest benefits attained through the kindness of the Sun, which is fiery; which error the Chaldeans afterward followed.“ And so he did a manifold injury both to God and to man. For God alone ought to have presided over man, which this man took away when he interposed himself; and at the same time he removed from God the worship due to Him; and to man he did injury, because he oppressed him with an unjust dominion, and led him into error by deceiving him. But let us examine the words of Moses.4
ISTE coepit esse potens in terra. Vocabulum Hebraeum significat robustum et fortem. Sed quia Nemrod propter magnitudinem roboris et virium animique audaciam primus ad maximam pervenit potentiam, recte Latinus vertit „Potens,“ qua voce et robur corporis et vim eius in dominando complexus est. Graeci codices, quos sequitur Augustinus, pro voce „potens“ vel „fortis“ habent „gigas“: quo significatur Nemrod fuisse gigantem corporis mole, robore, audacia, superbia, crudelitate; nam ista omnia notione vocabuli Gigantis significari in sacris literis alio loco docuimus. Sed quomodo iste coepit esse gigas, cum ante diluvium fuisse complures gigantes supra capite sexto proditum sit a Mose? Respondet Augustinus fuisse primum post diluvium — primum dico vel tempore, vel excellentia virtutis giganteae et hominum fama.
‘This man began to be mighty in the earth.’ The Hebrew word means robust and strong. But because Nemrod, on account of the greatness of his strength and powers and the audacity of his spirit, first attained the greatest power, the Latin rightly rendered ‘Mighty,’ by which word it has embraced both the strength of his body and his force in domination. The Greek codices, whom Augustine follows, have for the word ‘mighty’ or ‘strong’ the word ‘giant’: by which it is signified that Nemrod was a giant in bulk of body, in strength, audacity, pride, cruelty; for that all these are signified by the notion of the word ‘Giant’ in the sacred letters we have taught in another place. But how did this man begin to be a giant, when before the flood there were several giants, as is set forth above by Moses in the sixth chapter? Augustine answers that he was the first after the flood — first, I say, either in time, or in the excellence of giant-like strength and in the fame of men.5
SEQUITUR: Et erat robustus venator coram Domino. Quod supra verterat „potens,“ nunc vertit „robustus“; idem enim vocabulum utrobique Hebraeum est; pro quo Graeci codices, ut supra, hic etiam habent „gigas,“ nonnulli autem „violentus.“ Vox „venator,“ si proprie sumatur, significat eum fuisse venatorem ferarum, et maxime deditum venationi, quae est principum et magnatum exercitatio. Sin autem id verbi per metaphoram sit positum, significat insidiosum et violentum oppressorem hominum. Feras enim venando, partim astu et insidiis, partim per vim capimus, nostroque servitio et usui subiicimus; et hoc videtur convenientius et narrationi Mosis et iis quae de Nemrod feruntur. Sane vocabulo venatoris insinuatur Nemrod fuisse hominem crudelem et sanguinarium, et caedis hominum per potentiam ac violentiam cupidissimum: sunt enim venationes quasi quaedam bellorum progymnasmata; his nempe quibusdam quasi tyrociniis a ferarum caede ad necem hominum animus inardescit atque inflammatur. Quod olim sensisse Persas venationi deditissimos declaravit pater Cyri, ut narrat Xenophon: „Si quando,“ inquit, „bellum ingrueret, ut cum necessitas tulerit possitis hominem petere, decipere, circumvenire, non in hominibus exercemus vos, sed in bestiis, ne forte amicis quoque incommodetis; et ut cum bellum inciderit, tunc aggrediendi, circumveniendi caedendique hostem audaciam pariter ac peritiam habeatis.“
There follows: ‘And he was a robust hunter before the Lord.’ What above he had rendered ‘mighty,’ he now renders ‘robust’; for the Hebrew word is the same in both places; for which the Greek codices, as above, here too have ‘giant,’ but some have ‘violent.’ The word ‘hunter,’ if taken properly, signifies that he was a hunter of wild beasts, and most devoted to the chase, which is the exercise of princes and magnates. But if that word be set down by metaphor, it signifies a treacherous and violent oppressor of men. For wild beasts we take by hunting, partly by cunning and ambush, partly by force, and subject them to our service and use; and this seems more fitting both to Moses's narrative and to the things reported of Nemrod. Indeed by the word ‘hunter’ it is intimated that Nemrod was a cruel and bloodthirsty man, and most eager for the slaughter of men through power and violence: for huntings are, as it were, certain preludes of wars; by these, namely, as by certain apprenticeships, the spirit is kindled and inflamed from the slaughter of beasts to the killing of men. That the Persians, most devoted to hunting, once held this view, the father of Cyrus declared, as Xenophon relates: „Whenever a war should press upon us, that when necessity has brought it you may be able to attack, deceive, and surround a man, we train you not on men but on beasts, lest perchance you do harm to friends as well; and so that, when war befalls, you may then have both the audacity and the skill of attacking, surrounding, and slaying the enemy.“6
ILLUD „coram Domino,“ quam vim hoc loco habeat non est facile intellectu; quocirca multiplex eius interpretatio adinventa est. Quidam Hebraice scientes putant esse Hebraismum, idemque significare „coram Domino“ quod „sub caelo“; et sensum esse Nemrod fuisse hominum qui sub caelo erant robustissimum. His ego assentirer, si hoc ex aliis scripturae locis probarent.
That phrase ‘before the Lord’ — what force it has in this place is not easy to understand; wherefore a manifold interpretation of it has been devised. Some who know Hebrew think it is a Hebraism, and that ‘before the Lord’ means the same as ‘under heaven’; and that the sense is that Nemrod was the most robust of the men who were under heaven. With these I would agree, if they proved this from other passages of Scripture.7
Sanctus Augustinus in malam partem id accepit, quasi „coram Domino“ sit idem atque „contra Dominum,“ ita scribens: „Tutam veramque in caelum viam molitur humilitas, sursum levans cor ad Dominum, non contra Dominum, sicut Nemrod gigas venator contra Dominum. Quod non intelligentes nonnulli ambiguo Graeco textu decepti sunt, ut non interpretarentur „contra Dominum“ sed „ante Dominum“; ἐναντίον enim et „contra“ et „ante“ significat: hoc enim verbum est in Psalmo, „Ploremus ante Dominum qui fecit nos“; idemque est in libro Iob, in quo scriptum est: „In furorem erupit contra Dominum.“ Sic etiam intelligendus est gigas ille contra Dominum. Quid autem est venator, nisi animalium terrigenarum deceptor, oppressor, extinctor? Erigebat ergo cum suis populis turrim contra Dominum, qua est impia significata superbia.“ Sic Augustinus.
Saint Augustine took it in a bad sense, as though ‘before the Lord’ were the same as ‘against the Lord,’ writing thus: „A safe and true road to heaven is built by humility, lifting the heart upward to the Lord, not against the Lord, as Nemrod the giant was a hunter against the Lord. And some, not understanding this, were deceived by the ambiguous Greek text, so as to interpret not ‘against the Lord’ but ‘before the Lord’; for ἐναντίον means both ‘against’ and ‘before’: for this word is in the Psalm, ‘Let us weep before the Lord who made us’; and the same is in the book of Job, in which it is written: ‘He broke out in fury against the Lord.’ So too is that giant to be understood as against the Lord. And what is a hunter, but a deceiver, oppressor, and destroyer of earth-born animals? He was therefore raising up, with his peoples, a tower against the Lord, by which impious pride is signified.“ So far Augustine.8
QUIDAM vero in bonam partem interpretantur, quasi Nemrod Deum sacrificiis, quae ex captis a se feris comparaverat, placare studuerit. Huic sententiae valde astipulatur Aben-Ezra, scribens in Commentario huius loci Nemrod altaria struxisse, in quibus feras quas venabatur Domino in holocaustum obtulerit. Nec obvolvendum silentio est quod super hunc locum dicit Caietanus his verbis: „Quod dicitur „coram Domino,“ velut est Hebraice „in faciebus Dei,“ dupliciter exponi potest: vel contemptim, hoc est, contempto conspectu divino, ut sit dictum ad exaggerationem peccati, quemadmodum exaggeratur crimen commissum spectante Praetore; vel simulate, ad significandum quod Nemrod hinc simulabat se esse Deicolam, inde vero exercebat tyrannidem. Oportet enim, secundum Philosophorum documenta, Principem esse Deicolam, ut populus minus putet se pati iniustum. Et hic sensus magis quadrat contextui: subiungitur enim inde esse derivatum proverbium; non est autem verisimile versum fuisse in proverbium dignum ut narraretur a Mose dictum continens tam ingentem blasphemiam, quantam continet primus sensus.“ Ita Caietanus.
But some interpret it in a good sense, as though Nemrod strove to appease God with sacrifices which he had procured from the wild beasts he had taken. To this opinion Aben-Ezra strongly assents, writing in his Commentary on this passage that Nemrod built altars on which he offered to the Lord, as a holocaust, the beasts he hunted. Nor is what Cajetan says on this passage to be wrapped in silence; in these words: „What is said ‘before the Lord,’ as it is in the Hebrew ‘in the faces of God,’ can be expounded in two ways: either contemptuously, that is, with the divine sight despised, so that it is said to magnify the sin — just as a crime committed is magnified when the Praetor is watching; or feignedly, to signify that Nemrod on the one hand pretended himself to be a worshipper of God, while on the other he exercised tyranny. For it is necessary, according to the teachings of the Philosophers, that a Prince be a worshipper of God, so that the people may think themselves less to suffer injustice. And this sense fits the context better: for it is subjoined that the proverb was derived therefrom; but it is not likely that there should have been turned into a proverb, worthy to be narrated by Moses, a saying containing so enormous a blasphemy as the first sense contains.“ So Cajetan.9
VERUM illa mihi videtur simplicior et planior, eoque probabilior expositio: illis verbis „coram Domino,“ vel „in oculis sive in conspectu Domini,“ fuisse robustum, non aliud significari quam revera et maxime fuisse robustum. Quod enim apud Deum tale est, id revera et simpliciter et maxime tale est. Deus enim iudicat et aestimat rem uti est, non sic homines, quorum existimatio et iudicium saepe fallax est. Ad hunc modum praenuntiatum est ab Angelo Ioannem Baptistam futurum magnum coram Domino, id est, vere et valde magnum. Illud porro quod sequitur, „Ab hoc exivit proverbium, Quasi Nemrod robustus venator coram Domino,“ hanc vim et sententiam habet: tantam fuisse fortitudinem et potentiam Nemrod, tantamque de eo apud homines eius temporis existimationem et famam, ut cum demonstrare vellent aliquem fortissimum esse, dicerent esse alterum Nemrod; ut nos…
But that exposition seems to me simpler and plainer, and on that account more probable: that by those words ‘before the Lord,’ or ‘in the eyes or in the sight of the Lord,’ he was robust, nothing else is signified than that he was in very truth and to the highest degree robust. For what is such before God, that is in truth and simply and to the highest degree such. For God judges and estimates a thing as it is, not so men, whose estimation and judgment is often deceptive. In this manner it was foretold by the Angel that John the Baptist would be ‘great before the Lord,’ that is, truly and very great. Furthermore, that which follows, ‘From him went forth the proverb, As Nemrod a robust hunter before the Lord,’ has this force and meaning: that the fortitude and power of Nemrod was so great, and the esteem and fame of him among the men of his time so great, that when they wished to show that someone was very strong, they would say he was a second Nemrod; just as we…10
…nos appellamus Alexandrum vel Achillem, quem magnanimum vel fortem significare volumus.
…just as we call someone an Alexander or an Achilles, when we wish to signify that he is magnanimous or brave.11

Translator’s notes

  1. Gen 10:8–9 (verse lemma). ↩
  2. Gen 10:8–9 lemma comment. Nemrod, Chus's 6th son, treated separately for his eminence. Augustine (City of God bk. 16 ch. 3): Chus named first among Cham's sons; the ‘giant’ Nemrod either born after his grandsons or set apart by Scripture for his eminence — his kingdom (beginning with Babylon) being named. Margins: Augustine, City of God bk. 16 ch. 3; why Moses treated Nemrod separately. ↩
  3. §55. Nemrod the first tyrant: before him the firstborn ruled each family by natural authority; he first coveted dominion over others, reigning at Babylon — so the first tyranny arose in the ‘mother of the confusion of tongues,’ legitimate rule perverted along with language. Jerome: Nemrod seized an unwonted tyranny and reigned in Babel. Margins: the first king or tyrant after the flood was Nemrod; Jerome, Hebrew Questions on Genesis. ↩
  4. §56. Nemrod's idolatry (a writer's Annotations on Genesis): surpassing men in size and strength, he ruled by violence and led men to worship fire as a god (seeing the Sun's fiery benefits) — the error the Chaldeans later followed. So he wronged both God (usurping His rule and the worship due Him) and man (unjust dominion + deceiving into error). ↩
  5. §57. ‘Began to be mighty’ (Hebrew = robust/strong); the Vulgate's ‘potens’ captures bodily strength + dominating force. The Greek (followed by Augustine) reads ‘giant’ = great bulk, strength, audacity, pride, cruelty. How a ‘giant,’ since Gen 6 had pre-flood giants? Augustine: Nemrod was the first such after the flood — first in time, or in giant-strength and fame. Margin: Augustine, City of God bk. 8 (the giant of this kind first after the flood). ↩
  6. §58. ‘A robust hunter’ (same Hebrew word as ‘mighty’; Greek ‘giant’/‘violent’). ‘Hunter’ literally = a hunter of beasts (sport of princes), or metaphorically a treacherous, violent oppressor of men — the latter fits Nemrod: hunts are ‘preludes of wars,’ training the spirit from killing beasts to killing men. Cyrus's father (Xenophon, Education of Cyrus bk. 1): the Persians train at hunting beasts, not men, to gain the audacity and skill for war. Margins: Augustine; how Nemrod was a hunter; hunting as exercise and apprenticeship for waging war; Xenophon, Education of Cyrus bk. 1. ↩
  7. §59. ‘Before the Lord’ — its force is hard to determine; several interpretations. (1) Some Hebraists: a Hebraism = ‘under heaven,’ i.e. Nemrod was the most robust of all men under heaven — Pererius would accept this if proved from other Scripture passages (continues p. 424). Margin: what it signifies that Nemrod was a hunter ‘before the Lord.’ ↩
  8. §59 (concl.). (2) Augustine (City of God bk. 16 ch. 4) takes it in a bad sense: ‘before the Lord’ = ‘against the Lord’ — humility lifts the heart to God, not against Him as Nemrod the giant hunter; the Greek ἐναντίον means both ‘before’ and ‘against’ (Ps 94/95:6; Job); the ‘hunter’ = deceiver/oppressor/destroyer, raising the tower against the Lord in impious pride. Margins: Augustine, City of God bk. 16 ch. 4; what ‘before the Lord’ means; Ps 94; Job. ↩
  9. §60. (3) Some take it in a good sense: Nemrod offered the beasts he caught to God in sacrifice — so Aben-Ezra (here: Nemrod built altars, offered hunted beasts as holocausts). (4) Cajetan: ‘before the Lord’ (Heb. ‘in the faces of God’) = either contemptuously (despising God's sight, magnifying the sin, as a crime before a watching magistrate) or feignedly (Nemrod posed as a God-worshipper while tyrannizing — a prince must seem pious so the people think themselves less wronged); the latter fits the proverb-context (no such blasphemy would be made a proverb worth Moses's record). Margins: Aben-Ezra; Cajetan. ↩
  10. §60 (cont.). Pererius's own (simpler, preferred) reading: ‘before the Lord’ = simply ‘in God's sight,’ i.e. truly and supremely robust — for God judges a thing as it really is, unlike fallible men (cf. the Angel's word that John the Baptist would be ‘great before the Lord’ = truly very great, Lk 1). The proverb ‘As Nemrod a robust hunter before the Lord’ means his strength/fame was so great that to call someone very strong they would say he was ‘a second Nemrod’ (continues p. 425). Margin: Lk 1 (John the Baptist). ↩
  11. §60 (concl.). End of the ‘second Nemrod’ proverb: as we call a brave man ‘an Alexander’ or ‘an Achilles.’ ↩